51–60 of 111 posts
I ran into these problems with std::unordered_map. While developing my game, I would always run it in debug mode because I need to debug it. Loading a game world was taking around 12 seconds, and it was beginning to grate on me because of the increased iteration times. So I decided to profile it and see what was taking so long. I compiled in release mode to begin debugging, and it magically took the world load time d…
I ran into these problems with std::unordered_map. While developing my game, I would always run it in debug mode because I need to debug it. Loading a game world was taking around 12 seconds, and it was beginning to grate on me because of the increased iteration times. So I decided to profile it and see what was taking so long. I compiled in release mode to begin debugging, and it magically took the world load time d…
I'm with Kernigham and Pike: the debugger is for getting a stack trace out of core dumps. Printf is for debugging.
I mean it does everything a printf() can do - except just better.
I ran into these problems with std::unordered_map. While developing my game, I would always run it in debug mode because I need to debug it. Loading a game world was taking around 12 seconds, and it was beginning to grate on me because of the increased iteration times. So I decided to profile it and see what was taking so long. I compiled in release mode to begin debugging, and it magically took the world load time d…
I've been using C++ since 1993. I still don't understand how I've written all this code and never once found myself using, or wishing I could use std::move. Presumably my code has been less than optimally efficient or something, because it seems that most people talking about "modern" C++ view it as absolutely central to the language.
Yep, it was either less efficient than it could be, or more clunky, or incorrect.
I remember back when boost was still a thing, everyone using boost::shared_ptr indiscriminately. Refcounting has a very nontrivial cost to it if implemented correctly.
Things like rvalue refs and std::move allow to properly implement the concept of "ownership transfer", obviating the need for costly ref counting in the majority of cases.
I'm with Kernigham and Pike: the debugger is for getting a stack trace out of core dumps. Printf is for debugging.
Why limit yourself to crusty text when you can have live visualizations of data structures in various formats, graph dx/dy over time of some variable, stop and inspect data on some condition without having to modify code, quickly start execution on a certain line, quickly drill down into struct members, etc. I mean it does everything a printf() can do - except just better.
Some programs simply have too much state, too complex of structures (for performance or memory reasons), or very long runtimes to reasonably debug purely with prints.
I've been using C++ since 1993. I still don't understand how I've written all this code and never once found myself using, or wishing I could use std::move. Presumably my code has been less than optimally efficient or something, because it seems that most people talking about "modern" C++ view it as absolutely central to the language.
I'm with Kernigham and Pike: the debugger is for getting a stack trace out of core dumps. Printf is for debugging.
Why limit yourself to crusty text when you can have live visualizations of data structures in various formats, graph dx/dy over time of some variable, stop and inspect data on some condition without having to modify code, quickly start execution on a certain line, quickly drill down into struct members, etc. I mean it does everything a printf() can do - except just better.
Because that's too fruity, real men (tm) don't use debuggers /s
Programmers are so funny, they'll present themselves as rational and logical, but then follow the advice of some old geezer who thinks syntax highlighting is for pussies rather than admitting that their tools suck and need to be better.
I have a particular chip on my shoulder about this whole printf debugging thing: https://twitter.com/nice_byte/status/1465200027672866816
I'm with Kernigham and Pike: the debugger is for getting a stack trace out of core dumps. Printf is for debugging.
Why limit yourself to crusty text when you can have live visualizations of data structures in various formats, graph dx/dy over time of some variable, stop and inspect data on some condition without having to modify code, quickly start execution on a certain line, quickly drill down into struct members, etc. I mean it does everything a printf() can do - except just better.
If debuggers were reliable, I’d take them over printf-debugging any day. But to this day I’ve never seen one that is.